x

Please fill out this short user survey of only 3 questions in order to help us improve the site. We appreciate your feedback!
Back to History Current Version
The effect of information provision on support for saving more lives
Last registered on January 21, 2021

Pre-Trial

Trial Information
General Information
Title
The effect of information provision on support for saving more lives
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0006370
Initial registration date
October 22, 2020
Last updated
January 21, 2021 7:34 PM EST
Location(s)
Region
Primary Investigator
Affiliation
Monash University
Other Primary Investigator(s)
PI Affiliation
Monash University
Additional Trial Information
Status
Completed
Start date
2020-10-22
End date
2020-10-30
Secondary IDs
Abstract
Public health strategies to deal with pandemics, including Covid-19, are primarily guided by the principle of saving more lives. Public opposition towards the recommendations and directives of health authorities suggests that a sizeable fraction of the population may not subscribe to the same principle. Using a randomized controlled experiment, we examine whether providing information about the ethical considerations that guide public health strategies affects the individual preferences for saving more lives, and the likelihood of social agreement on this principle.
External Link(s)
Registration Citation
Citation
Rai, Birendra and Liang Choon Wang. 2021. "The effect of information provision on support for saving more lives." AEA RCT Registry. January 21. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.6370-1.2000000000000002.
Experimental Details
Interventions
Intervention(s)
Participants are provided with information related to the prioritization criteria and ethical considerations used by public health authorities in the allocation of scarce life-saving medical treatments.
Intervention Start Date
2020-10-22
Intervention End Date
2020-10-30
Primary Outcomes
Primary Outcomes (end points)
The primary outcome variables are:
1. A binary variable (Save lives) indicating whether or not a participant’s choice of the patients to receive ventilators in a scenario is consistent with the principle of saving more lives (see Table 4 in the analysis plan). This save lives variable can be decomposed into two subgroups according to the definition of saving more healthy-lives (see Table 5 in the analysis plan).
2. A binary variable (Save life-years) indicating whether or not a participant’s choice of the patients to receive ventilators in a scenario is consistent with saving more life-years (see Table 4 in the analysis plan).
3. A binary variable indicating whether or not a participant’s choice of the patients to receive the available ventilators in a scenario is inconsistent with both saving more lives and saving more life-years.

The three measures above are mutually exclusive. There are two stages and five scenarios in each stage that a participant makes choices.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
Secondary Outcomes
Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)
Experimental Design
Experimental Design
The research involves a randomized controlled choice experiment. The experiment contains several stages and these stages differ slightly between the treatment group and control group.
Experimental Design Details
The research involves a randomized controlled choice experiment. The experiment contains several stages and these stages differ slightly between the treatment group and control group.

We describe the experimental design in detail in Section 2 of the analysis plan.
Randomization Method
Randomization based on Qualtrics randomizer that ensures treatment and control are evenly present.
Randomization Unit
Individual participant
Was the treatment clustered?
Yes
Experiment Characteristics
Sample size: planned number of clusters
600 individuals (participants)
Sample size: planned number of observations
6000 observations (600 participants x 5 scenarios x 2 stages)
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
3000 observations per treatment arm (300 participants, 5 scenarios and 2 stages per arm).
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
IRB
INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARDS (IRBs)
IRB Name
Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee
IRB Approval Date
2020-07-31
IRB Approval Number
25547
Analysis Plan
Analysis Plan Documents
Pre-alaysis Plan

MD5: f05b0285ecf2ed98ae055413b0a1b467

SHA1: cf47cf2531057c824a0c198af08816cc9dc1e87f

Uploaded At: October 22, 2020

Post-Trial
Post Trial Information
Study Withdrawal
Intervention
Is the intervention completed?
Yes
Intervention Completion Date
October 30, 2020, 12:00 AM +00:00
Is data collection complete?
Yes
Data Collection Completion Date
October 30, 2020, 12:00 AM +00:00
Final Sample Size: Number of Clusters (Unit of Randomization)
700 participants
Was attrition correlated with treatment status?
No
Final Sample Size: Total Number of Observations
3500 decisions in stage 1 (personal decisions)
3500 decisions in stage 2 (coordination decisions)
Final Sample Size (or Number of Clusters) by Treatment Arms
345 participants in the control group, 355 participants in the information treatment group.
Data Publication
Data Publication
Is public data available?
No

This section is unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access to this information.

Request Information
Program Files
Program Files
No
Reports, Papers & Other Materials
Relevant Paper(s)
REPORTS & OTHER MATERIALS